TechWhirl Sponsors

About TechWhirl

TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.

For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.

>> Serifs were carved on monuments, not for legibility, but to prevent the
stone from
>> cracking at the end of the letter. Notice that serifs were only carved at
>> the ends of long, straight lines.

Only on the Internet, Tim, would I get such an authoritative response to an
offhand remark. I can only hope you had a twinkle in your eye as you wrote
it. (Perhaps the emoticon for that is... *)

The rest of the collective discussion of serif versus sans serif fonts
touched on cultural bias, but in an almost dismissive way (e.g., Tim
continued, "Further, the studies that have allegedly shot down serif or sans
serif in legibility competitions are inconclusive and usually culturally
biased."). Assuming for the moment that's true, what are you going to do
about it? Publish sans serif body copy and tell your customers they'll get
used to it? Check out the schoolbooks and childrens' books and you'll see an
overwhelming majority of serif typefaces. Trying to change the cultural bias,
or publish against it, would seem futile to me. Wouldn't you agree?

(One useful point I derived from your observation is that if a document were
intended for European distribution, a sans serif face *might* be more
appropriate.)